CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com
New! Search comments:
(NOTE: Relevance, Author, and Article are not applicable for comment searches)
I would agree with everything here. Offering a choice of players can get a potential trade partner to focus so much on the choice that they look less at the overall structure of the deal and whether it's the best deal s/he can get, or if there are other possibilities. That's not to say that this strategy is cover for offering two sub-optimal choices for the other franchise, but I've found making a couple of fair offers shows respect and facilitates trading. Just the act of considering options placed in front of them gets the other owner's wheels turning.
Ripping the other owner's franchise or players you've targeted is an awful strategy. That's high school stuff and really unprofessional.
Yeah, I had to pick my jaw up off the floor after seeing that.
Thanks! JP in the chat said Pache. I appreciate the independent thinking, and it looks like it's a coin flip anyway until there's some distinct separation.
Appreciate the work and what had to be intense discussions into the composition of the list.
Question for amateur prospect hounds: I have an upcoming pick in a prospect draft. These are not top 100 guys and won't be for at least another year or two, but would you rather have the Braves' <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=108343">Cristian Pache</a></span> or the Rays' <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/player_search.php?search_name=Jesus+Sanchez">Jesus Sanchez</a></span>?
MLB.com produces the worst prospect lists in the business, and it isn't even close.
Not a fan of this idea, with benches already super short. The idea of going into the eighth and ninth innings with few or no bullets left to fire is a non-starter, no pun intended.
What's the prognosis for <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70403">Shawn Morimando</a></span>? Setup man/backend starter type?
I would guess most of this season at AAA with a late season cup of coffee in MLB, with 2018 playing time dependent on need. But third base isn't filled with world beaters and Panik's long-term value remains to be seen, so I'd say Arroyo would be up after the Super 2 deadline, sometime in mid- to late April 2018 as long as he doesn't stumble at Sacramento.
Wow, the six-man rotation is really happening.
I am a Giants follower, and trust me -- the system really is that far down right now. The one bright spot is that BA and ESPN seem to be higher than the BP guys on <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70759">Tyler Beede</a></span>, listing him as a top 100 prospect, but really, who else is on this list whom you can get excited about? No one that I can see.
<span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=100525">Walker Lockett</a></span> -- sixth starter/long reliever type? With the weak major-league rotation, it seems like he could get a chance to start in the majors this season.
Thanks, Ben. Also, count me as one who recognizes the difficulty of writing up 300+ prospects and appreciates a bit of levity in such a restrictive format.
<span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/player_search.php?search_name=Daniel+Robertson">Daniel Robertson</a></span> can't get even a mention? Not even over <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=66939">Ryan Brett</a></span>?
That wasn't bratty at all but a legitimate question that I had as well (I own him in my sim league).
<span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=101662">Carlos Tocci</a></span> has been getting some love in winter ball. Anything to get excited about there?
Anything much to be expected from either <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=102436">Chad Pinder</a></span> or Joey Wendle?
This isn't sim baseball. That's the kind of decision that gets people fired when someone shreds a knee or pops an Achilles.
GIVE ME AN EDIT KEY ... that should be "audience members who DO NOT choose to fully participate."
I personally like the gifs more than the videos. It's effortless and they play on my iPhone and my laptop, and I hope they do more of it. This is a visual age, and those elements are a vital component of multimedia. I hope you're not suggesting that the site be made less visual in order to cater to audience members who choose to fully participate in a more immersive experience, because you're not going to stop the tide.
That's what this section is for. Fill the rest of us in.
We must have different ideas of what "fun" is.
Sorry, meant that Jay grounded out.
I don't think one can assume that Pomeranz strikes out and Jay flies out if Upton remains on third. This isn't Strat-O-Matic. All sorts of factors are different. (Or, as a Strat-playing friend once told me, "It's a different time-space continuum.)
Also, the outfielder's name is <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=65918">Matt Szczur</a></span>.
Thanks for an interesting piece!
Umm, wrong Urias.
A third of a season is still a small sample size. I'll take a long-term scouting view over the most optimistic interpretations of two months of stats.
S'all right, glad to see the stat line. Guy's gonna remember that game and tell stories about it for the rest of his life.
How do the development paths of <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70950">Bradley Zimmer</a></span> and <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=102429">Clint Frazier</a></span> compare at this point? Frazier is having a better couple of months to start the season, but Zimmer continues to draw more attention, probably attesting to expectations; I seem to recall that he was thought of as someone who could contribute pretty quickly out of college, while the also talented Frazier might be more of a slow burn, level-a-year type.
Missing a stat line on <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=103055">Jonathan Hernandez</a></span>: he went 6 6 3 3 2 10, 85 pitches.
Just one POV, but this Q&A was recently posted on a klawchat:
Matt: On Bregman, I don’t know anything about his defensive abilities, but the numbers say that Correa has not been a great defensive SS in the Majors. Any chance they could move Correa to 3B and have Bregman play SS?
Klaw: I’m defaulting to my old assessment of Correa’s future, which was that he’d be better off at third base. He did work his tail off to stay at short, but he might be elite at third. Worked out OK for Machado, at least.
That's <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=107195">Yaisel Sierra</a></span> ... thanks, autocorrect.
Yasiel Sierra posted his first clean sheet last night in his third start, against Lancaster: 6 2 0 0 3 3.
He's a teenager. What's the rush?
You're right, what I meant to say was "this particular power-hitting lf-3b," meaning specifically Bryant vs. Correa, wbo is ranked third on this list.
There is no universe in which a power-hitting lf-3b is more valuable than a do-it-all-and-very-well shortstop.
I think of this list like a ranking of trade targets. Is there really any GM out there who would not take <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=102559">J.P. Crawford</a></span> over <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=68156">Maikel Franco</a></span> or <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70943">Aaron Nola</a></span>? Anyone who wouldn't ought to be fired.
Also, you forgot "for half a season" in stating how Franco and Nola were such impact players for a last-place team.
Ah, the 69a/69b thing between Swanson and Duffy confused me and made me think that Duffy just hadn't been removed. So it's really 176 players then. Thanks!
<span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=100736">Matt Duffy</a></span> is listed at 69.5. Since he is over 25 now, I assume that is some kind of oversight or inadvertent non-deletion?
"Arizona fall league"
Missing an MLB ETA on <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=104176">Eloy Jimenez</a></span>. Nice job, congratulations on another offseason batch of writeups well done.
FYI, it's Yaisel Sierra (first name is misspelled), and your writeup refers to him as Heredia.
What's the outlook for <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=102107">Jairo Beras</a></span>?
There's no way in hell this system is worse than that of the Angels.
Does center field prospect <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=103854">Wes Rogers</a></span> hold any allure for you guys?
Appreciate this installment, it's great -- everyone wants the jump on the fast risers.
Gah, I had forgotten you had mentioned him in passing in the 25-and-under section. Thanks!
Should have asked this last week. I know <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=68741">Cody Anderson</a></span> is not a prospect anymore, but can he sustain this level of performance or even continue to be an effective pitcher with such low strikeout rates?
Looks like someone is trolling or misdirecting his league members.
Wrong conjunction. There's a chance the Braves might find the next Maddux, Smoltz OR Glavine.
Seems like this system has gone from about 23rd to like 9th in a year ... is that about right?
Does <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70767">Tyler Goeddel</a></span> have much of a chance to be <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=66013">Odubel Herrera</a></span> light this season?
Sorry, I meant two more more grades <50. Less than.
When you are talking about the best prospects, that averaging is very much wrong.
Such combinations are so rare that they make a prospect better (more valuable) than the sum of his parts. A 70/70/70 pitcher, with three near elite pitches, is an 80. It makes sense if you think about it a while. That's a Hall of Famer! But this applies only at the far end of the curve, when you're talking about near-elite skills and across-the-board talent and versatility.
You can count on one hand the SS prospects with that combination of good to great talents. Everyone else is a 30 power, or a 40 range, or a 50 bat, and usually two or more grades >50. So to be very good in everything except one thing, and to be average in that (and presumably that's good power for a shortstop) -- that's a near elite prospect.
It's not something you average out. That's a combination of tools and potential and ratings that's rarely seen. Players with 70s across the board basically don't exist -- they're Hall of Famers, 80s.
Most prospects are above average in an area or two and average or below in two or more areas, so for Crawford to be average in one with multiple 60s ... how often do you see that, especially for a shortstop? Not often at all.
At the extremes in prospecting, it seems like great across the board is Hall of Fame, good across the board (60) makes a great prospect, and below average across the board (40 and below) makes a non-prospect.
While that was definitely an overpay on the Orioles' part, let's wait for Rodriguez to win, say, 150 major-league games before ranking it with the Bagwell trade.
Are you guys making all these lists non-premium this offseason? Or perhaps just those of the weaker systems? Thanks for all your work on these, they're much appreciated.
A Bay Area media person told me "the A's hated Lawrie." I asked if it was because his bat was not as loud as advertised, or a personality thing. I was told the latter. When that's the case, sometimes you have to do what you can to clear the decks.
Wow. Had only read about him, never thought to "see" him. "Fielderesque" doesn't even begin to describe him.
Needless to say, I am now rooting for him.
Wow, <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70546">Clayton Blackburn</a></span> can't even get a mention.
No <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=104847">Kodi Medeiros</a></span>, even among the sloppy seconds ... interesting. Clearly no one they talked to thinks he can start.
If scouts don't see <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=67084">J.T. Realmuto</a></span> as the catcher of the future, do they see him as a backup, or possibly moving to another position? He seems athletic and speedy enough to handle some other spots, though his bat seems most suited to catching.
You guys might want to change the sub-headline from August to October. Is <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=34706">Aledmys Diaz</a></span> worth getting excited about at this point?
Perhaps this is one place where stats and scouting can intersect. I'm guessing that most of the names on that list of high achievers were highly thought of by scouts -- many of them were first round picks, after all. And no one would have confused Heston's scouting reports -- fifth starter, according to <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=38350">Keith Law</a></span>, who maintains that stance in a recent chat -- with those of <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=67148">Taijuan Walker</a></span> or <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=66326">Yordano Ventura</a></span>.
<span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=102430">Josh Hart</a></span> writeup needs a credit tag line. Interesting piece and perspective, thanks.
The fact that this comment was made without any apparent irony is what makes it so special.
I hope you'll be able to find a way to let us all know where you land, possibly through these comments if BP will allow it.
Nice insight, appreciate nuggets like this.
All stalkers have their targets' phone numbers.
Hate to see a lack of comments on this ... this was the most interesting piece to me today simply because none of these guys are currently owned in my league. Really appreciate a look at some up and coming guys who aren't all first-rounders or J2 signings.
Vogelbach should just go the <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=16737">Rod Beck</a></span> route, since "you can't pull fat."
Just for posterity's sake, you might want to change yesterday's headline, which also says August 20. Nice diversity in names today, mentions I haven't seen a ton of this year.
Those earlier Giants teams were very veteran laden. Who's a hitting coach going to be able to have the most impact on? Young guys like the infield outside Belt.
I really appreciated this because I mixed it up with someone at MLBTR who wanted to give POSEY the credit for all the Giants' good hitting, like Meulens' experience with McCutchen in Pittsburgh was nothing, or that he couldn't possibly be a good hitting coach because he was so meh as a ballplayer. This is really the first piece I've seen anywhere giving credit where it is due.
Do any of these guys seem like they might be fast movers? In this case, I realize this means something like a MLB debut in late 2019 or 2020.
Has Mader shown gradual improvement this year in terms of command? Does his realistic projection still hover around middle relief, as it did when you guys pegged him the Marlins' #10 prospect before the season?
It did take me a few seconds to remember that. There were the endless discussions about whether Appel made more money by sitting out a year, since he would short himself an earning year in the end, but I don't recall the resolution of those. But if he ever thought he didn't like the game that much or didn't figure on a long career, then the money from waiting to be taken 1.1 would be more in the long run.
I saw BA saying that the Reds got three potential starters back, and from what I've read elsewhere that seems highly optimistic. Three very nice bullpen options is far more likely.
Love this segment on guys lurking just under the mainstream radar -- I'd certainly heard the names of all these guys but this is just a great source of information on them. Really appreciate it.
I believe this particular case is from the batter's perspective. Not sure this is how it's always done, but it seems to be operative here.
So if the Cody Reeds took on the Matt Duffys in a tag-team, who would win?
It's Skorupa. Come on, the guy works with you!
Scoresheet does, based on current stats. However, we use Diamond Mind, with each owner playing his road games (or Netplaying them in combination with the other owner) and sending them in for collection and posting to the website. If you ever played Strat or APBA growing up, DMB is basically next-gen and moved to the computer.
As someone who helps run a 30-team sim league, where player values mirror what MLB teams have to work with, I really enjoy these kinds of pieces. Most of these guys never get a spotlight on them, and they're the caliber of player most often available in trades or free agency. So thanks for this!
Thanks, I wondered this exact thing.
Any way you guys could add a designator as to level (AAA, AA, A+, A-, SS, etc.) after a guy's name, or somewhere in each capsule? These are very helpful when there isn't enough for a full scouting writeup, but it isn't always easy to tell how far away a guy is, and not all the names link back to a BP profile page.
What the hell is going on here. I know I just got up, and not a lot is making sense to me just yet, but I never thought I'd agree with bfawcett but this seems like a failed experiment in creative writing.
"It was my first live look at Alec Hanson since the 2016 Big 12 Championship game ..."
Since you're back from the future, can you tell me who wins the 2015 World Series and the 2016 Super Bowl? Got a Vegas trip coming up.
Never mind, the story totally renders differently on my phone than my laptop, and several headshots are duplicated. Plus, <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=102668">Ryan McMahon</a></span>'s headshot appears next to the Comments link.
So <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/player_search.php?search_name=Jose+De+Leon">Jose De Leon</a></span> and <span class="playerdef"><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=70271">Blake Snell</a></span> were separated at birth? That's the only way I can explain their uncanny likenesses and similar talents.
An uninspiring collection of projections. Not arguing with them in any way, just pointing out that I've heard a fair bit about all of these guys in the past year, so it's interesting that the estimates of their future impact feel so low. I think Refsnyder is the only one whose projection matches the middling reports I'd heard about him previously.
Then again, a #4 starter projection is nothing to sneeze at; I guess anytime I hear about a starting pitcher candidate, I hope/assume/expect he's going to be MOR (#3) or higher.
First I've heard of Balaguert, is he a real prospect? 22 is old for low A.
While I enjoyed this piece, it seems like a once-a-year one-off to me. Most of these guys will never make an impact in the major leagues; some won't even reach the show. To dig even deeper? Now you're talking about fifth line prospects:
-- Top prospects
-- Typical prospects
-- Fringe prospects, which is what this piece is about
Really appreciate those updates, guys -- it's like a second MLU on the day.
Encouraging lawless behavior AND use of mobile devices in a moving car ... awesome.
It's DeSclafani, that's why his name doesn't link on first reference. Interesting column today, thanks.
My understanding in Colome's case is that his 50-game drug suspension created some possibly unforeseen delays with immigration. They probably had the paperwork done according to a normal schedule and the extra delay messed that up.
Know what BP needs? More Kershaw.
Seriously, though, interesting stuff. Your links below are kind of useless until you differentiate the headlines a little bit, however.
I would add that starting pitchers are going to have a harder time buying into this kind of platoon because no one wants to be in a situation where they can get all of the blame (a loss) but none of the credit (a win) if they can only go a max of three innings.
Because Tony La Russa's starting pitchers have been unable to get past the middle innings consistently this season, he has refused to let them try anymore.
The Oakland Athletics manager last night unveiled a platoon system for his starting rotation that he and pitching coach Dave Duncan have been sitting on since they first discussed it 11 years ago while with the Chicago White Sox.
La Russa, who has 13 pitchers on his active roster, scrapped the traditional five-man rotation for a nine-man rotation divided into three-man platoons. Todd Van Poppel, Ron Darling and Kelly Downs are in the first group; Mike Mohler, Bobby Witt and John Briscoe in the second; and Bob Welch, Shawn Hillegas and Rich Gossage in the third.
Dennis Eckersley remains the closer in a four-man bullpen.
Limiting each pitcher in the platoon to between 40 and 60 pitches, the system allows La Russa to send out each group on two days rest.
It's not a party until fawcettb chimes in with a "would you guys knock it off."
Six spots ahead or behind is nothing on a list like this.
Humorless AND pedantic. Great combination.
I don't think any bread is missing, it just has a little extra mustard on it.
These guys have several different iterations of this list to deal with. I can't imagine wanting to do all of those and be as unimaginative and humorless as you want them to be. You may have an idea of what the writers here should be, but I don't think this is a site for overly literal and curmudgeonly commenters either.
Tito Polo and the guy with the initials Y.Y. -- I've already forgotten his name.
Bret, was the third part of the 10-round, 15-team minors draft published, and did I miss it? Is it ongoing?
I see a whole lot of Eric Sogard and Alberto Callaspo and Tommy Milone on this list.
Lesson No. 1: No one else cares about your fantasy team. Not your spouse, not your friends, not your family, not your shrink, not your pastor, not strangers on the Internet. No one.
Lesson No. 2: Braggarts suck.
Nerd Power, we hardly knew ye.
Three concussions in four years. Of course, that's one season for some NFL players.
It's just like reading Twitter.
Couple of edits ... Guerrero is a P, not an OF, and Cory Spangenberg's first name is misspelled, which is why it doesn't link back to his page.
Nothing on Andrew Chafin? Thought he would at least get a mention in "Factors on the Farm." Is he looking like a secondary lefty out of the pen?
Not really related to the theme of this piece, and I have no proof of this, but as a San Franciscan who works in media, I've heard that Sabean's worst decisions as GM were dictated by management, in particular signing Zito and punting draft picks to sign nobodies like Michael Tucker. If so, that makes his record all the more impressive. When has ownership ever gotten involved in personnel decisions and had it work out?
The Phillies could use some supplemental contact.
Contact = content?
Hurling batteries doesn't happen here. Now, beating up people in the parking lot or surrounding streets, that's another story (though still rare).
The Dodgers won 4-1, not 4-0. Love the daily recap, very enjoyable.
I like it. To each his own. I think it isn't going away anytime soon, though.
Keith Law says Sisco is not a catcher. If he's not behind the plate, do you guys see him at LF, 1B, DH, or what? Many thanks.
Jeter was 13-for-27 in All-Star Games, .481. That's pretty amazing hitting when he's facing no slouches on the mound.
Last night's lovefest also reminded me of one of the funnier sportswriting lines I'd read in the past year: "The worst thing you can say about Derek Jeter is that he enjoys the company of beautiful women." That's a pretty good way to be thought of.
Tilapia? What a fish.
He's really helping Alexander Guerrero cut down on his E(ar)s.
Good thing you're not being asked to do these things for Fox News, or you'd be covering topics like, "The Recent Spate of Rainouts Are Not Due to Climate Change," "President Obama's Ungainly First-Pitch Motion," and "The Railroading of Marge Schott."
Such a lazy critique. It's like insisting a coin must be biased for coming up heads eight times and tails twice in a random sampling.
Guessing that people are waiting for the training wheels to come off after surgery. Until that point it's just interesting. After that, it'll be exciting.
Paris, as mentioned in the first sentence. It was mentioned in the type at the bottom of the page.
"Incidentally, pushes lose (meaning essentially that for the Nats' 89, you had to bet over 89.5 or under 88.5, though you could bet the push, which seems like a really atupid bet at about 5 to 1) and teams have to play all 162 games -- one rainout not made up by a bad team and your bet is off."
Of course, by that last clause I mean that a team you bet on has to play all 162 games, not that the entire board is wiped out if every team doesn't play every game.
I was in Vegas last week for March Madness and looked at the season MLB over-unders at Paris' sports-book. There was an interesting odds shift with the Nats, whose total was 89 but whose odds on the over went from -125 to -150 in a week (the latter being wager $150, win $100, collect $250). I thought that was a bit of an overadjustment at first, but the odds shift means the Nats went from a 55.6% break-even percentage at -125 to 60% at -150. Take two solid starters out of the rotation of your main rival with Beachy and Medlen going under the knife and that seems like a reasonable shift.
The heaviest favorite on the board that I can recall was the Phillies to finish under 77 wins, but you had to lay -165 to do so. That's a 62.2 break-even percentage.
The Orioles were also a sizable favorite (maybe -140) to go over 80, post-Cruz and Jimenez.
Incidentally, pushes lose (meaning essentially that for the Nats' 89, you had to bet over 89.5 or under 88.5, though you could bet the push, which seems like a really atupid bet at about 5 to 1) and teams have to play all 162 games -- one rainout not made up by a bad team and your bet is off.
I want to think that this is satire, but it just seems too earnest to be anything other than the delusions of a true believer.
Correct, in the same way that the odds of drawing pocket aces are 1 in 221, but the odds of getting any pocket pair are 1 in 17. Coincidences really are much less remarkable than we think they are. Even if I have run into people I know in airports 9 or 10 times.
Jose Dominguez, 1IP, 2K ... does he look to have a spot in the crowded Dodgers' bullpen? Does he need more seasoning?
There's one second-half uptick that may be worth a flyer because of a documented change: Chris Iannetta got contacts and went from OPS of .688 through July to posting an .819 in the final two months.
He's at Tunnel.
What's the point of this comment? It's ambiguous, unnecessary and unenlightening. And, yeah, I'm a Keith Law fan, just as I'm a Jason Parks fan, and a fan of Kevin Goldstein before that, and the guys at Baseball America as well. What are you trying to say?
To me, "ugly floor" based on makeup would be the Patriots' Aaron Hernandez, accused killer, whose draft reports from several teams were marked DND. Admittedly I haven't read Jules Tygiel's book "Baseball's Greatest Experiment" in a couple of decades, but "ugly"?
Dennis Dugan is Kelly Dugan's dad? This is interesting for two reasons. One, IMDB lists DD as 5-foot-8 and his son is listed as 6-foot-3. Second, when I think of DD's acting career, I give him a solid 6 on the geekiness scouting scale, where 2 is Patrick Swayze and 8 is Eddie Deezen, who played the Aspergerish techie in "WarGames" ("Hey, Lightman!"). Incidentally, Deezen is also a huge baseball fan and may well be a subscriber here.
Sorry, was scanning the top 10 and the On the Rise and Factors on the Farm lists and didn't see him among those 16, so I assumed he wasn't worth a nod. Didn't check the under-25 list until later, where he's mentioned.
Jose Dominguez came up with fanfare and what was supposedly a three-digit fastball, but no mention of him here. Serious prospect or just hype?
That and "You can't scout a stat line." Those would interest me a lot more than #rig T-shirts.
I like the idea but it feels like some of the hexes being next to each other on the outside ring don't have anything to do with the ones next to them, and as an occasional video game player I feel like proximity implies a relationship. I might put them in order Power-Hit-Run-Glove-Arm, instead of Hit-Power-Run-Glove-Arm as speed contributes to average and ability to reach base. It's still not a great relationship ... maybe it's just not made for a hex-type graphic if visual relationships are important to you.
As far as the lead to this story, it reminds me of Damon Wayans' quote: "I like the concept of people, but people spoil it."
More specifically, the rumor was that Kent was showing off and popping wheelies, which makes the accident especially inane. Giants didn't contest it, though, even though they might have won a case, but they were probably right -- just sweep it under the rug, get it behind us, and don't build a wall between you and your player.
Really enjoyable tribute. Thanks.
Well, at least Tyrone Taylor and Victor Roache make the Reggie Cleveland Top 100 Prospect All-Stars.
Which Masahiro Tanaka is the black one and which is the white one?
People vastly overrate the relative position of players. Once you get out of the top 10 or so, a difference of opinion of 20 and maybe even 30 position spots tends to be blown out of proportion.
... and if ONE of Brett Jackson, Junior Lake or Matt Szczur becomes a decent bench player.
Don't think this can be done with any confidence or accuracy when Ben points out in his companion piece on thoughts about the signing that Kei Igawa posted very similar stats in the same league.
There's something to what you say, but it's apples and oranges. Nobody (that I have seen) is suggesting that Taveras might have to be a half-time player because of his violent swing, in the way that they are suggesting that here are the reasons that Edwards might be better cast as a reliever.
Slagging someone for the result of a childhood ailment, very classy. Did you stumble over here from Bleacher Report or something?
It's in the article.
Here's something I don't understand. I guess I don't find the movie that quote is derived from particularly funny, so I'm sure that colors my opinion of the comment, but all those likes for such a blatantly unoriginal (and, yes, unfunny) comment? Do people just automatically "like" something they recognize?
Says you. See how idiocy like that works?
Just neg the guy and be done with it.
The number of teams actually grew by 50%, not 33%. Common mistake though.
This has not been true of any of the metros I've worked at. Not by a long shot.
If you play in a $20 fantasy league, sure. If you play in a $100 league, that's a small price to pay for what are apparently some sizable advantages.
Unfortunately I don't think sim games at all capture this kind of granular statistical data but are more of a brute force approach based on the basic rate stats we're all used to. It seems to me that a card rated .300, whether a flyball or groundball hitter, will still hit .300 against a league average pitcher, whether that's a flyball or groundball guy.
If you're looking for undervalued Moneyball-type areas in baseball sims, look at CERA (component ERA), real-life quality of defense behind a pitcher, and switching ballparks. I'll leave it to you to assess their value.
I don't think you used all the tenses of the verb "speculate" as you could have. Why don't you tell us some more about how everything coming out of your mouth is wild supposition.
Media "jackals" ... please. There's far more professionalism at most media outlets than you could possibly imagine.
Daniel Corcino and Robert Stephenson are not that far away.
Google is your friend.
There are some amusing, curious and revealing memories of that game here:
While I vaguely remember a big deal being made out of that game, this is the only one I can find where Staub played both corners in the same game, according to his season gamelogs. 1980, 1982, 1983 and 1985 were the 1980s seasons where he played both LF and RF in the same season. However, this game shows only one defensive move on his part.
But now that I see the Retrosheet listing for this game, here:
it says in bold type in the 12th inning:
"Rusty Staub and Clint Hurdle alternated between LF and RF depending on batter handedness; it is not clear if they did it for every batter, so the change will only be listed once here, but it apparently happened several times ... "
Shame it isn't more specific.
Doesn't something have to exist to be studied? Or do you mean speculation?
"A question in reply though, meant only as a test of the limits: At what point would you?"
If I knew it could be worth two wins/20 runs, I would consider it at that point.
Bill James is the first guy I can remember pointing this out -- that the 1979 Orioles didn't win with Mark Belanger at shortstop, they started winning when they put Kiko Garcia in the lineup. Doesn't surprise me a bit that Earl Weaver would be involved with this somehow.
I wouldn't show up my poor fielding outfielder for a mere half dozen runs, or half a win, a season.
Did not see the NYT article but all the men you mentioned were pitchers. I can't imagine position players wear their weight as well as they age.
I was in a Strat-O-Matic league in the mid-1980s where members would occasionally submit articles to the league newsletter (all was snailmail back then!). A team owner named Tom Fish wrote an article about this subject, positing way back in 1984 that being 22 and younger in a MLB starting rotation was death on arms, citing guys like Wayne Simpson (age 21, 176 IP), Gary Nolan (19, 226.2) and Don Gullett (20, 217.2), I believe.
It's been a long time since I read that article, but it stuck with me because it seemed so prescient and has proved accurate to my eye over the years. Anyway, these ideas have been around a while, just not necessarily always among the baseball cognoscenti.
I have no idea whether it was Tom's idea originally, but it was the first I'd heard of this kind of health analysis, almost 30 years ago now. I can try and dredge it up if you're interested in seeing it, especially since it was written by an amateur analyst.
My guess is ROOZH-ned, but it's just a guess.
Every projection about him that I've seen hangs a utility infielder ceiling on Semien, so I'm going to go with "no."
Jeez, it's not like Correa is trash.
Thought maybe the 1990 NLCS finale where Pirates manager Jim Leyland started righty reliever Ted Power, who didn't start at all during the regular season, then pulled him in the third for lefty Zane Smith in hopes of turning around the Reds' lineup, might be in here. I'd like to read more about that game myself.
I doubt very highly that Wilmer Flores would make a top 100 list, let alone a top 50. Generally excels only when he repeats a level, doesn't look like he's going to post the roto-friendly stats like SB and HR ... I just don't see it.
As in Lawrence McCutcheon? He made five straight Pro Bowls.
It's one outing. Ricky Romero also had a couple of nice outings in the minor leagues recently before reverting to form.
It is mindless, because you presume that your chipping in has one iota of influence on what the BP staff does, or that they're intentionally slighting the NL. That is absolutely, completely and utterly brain-dead.
What an inane, mindless complaint.
Yes, when you factor in the utility value of money -- the first couple million is worth a lot more to you than the last $20 million or so -- then it's clear that it becomes very important to lock up a few million early. It's stupid money, as in you'd be stupid not to take it.
Of course, this is an argument for his having signed last year and taken that slightly smaller amount to get that under his belt ... and then cash in later as well with the big FA year, hopefully. When you look at it that way, I think it's entirely possible that Appel would have been better off signing last year. Of course, he stayed healthy and had an insurance policy to boot, but that's hindsight. Had he not ... well, you know how that story ends.
Tavares and Wong, a top position player combo? Maybe in the same way that Cy Young and his sister lead all sibling pairs in victories, or at least they did until the Niekros came along.
Does Lamb seem like a candidate for the bullpen given what you observed from his last start (and from prior outings), if he can't hold his velocity deep into games?
You guys rock.
Is there a chance of getting a similar feature on Alex Colome, who starts tonight? Didn't realize he was going to get a start, thought it was just relief.
Your template is showing on Brandon Workman's line.
That book did not sound good at all. Like some literary dweeb's idea of what ballplayers and baseball are like, but really he's imagining his dweeby friends as ballplayers and using the sport as metaphor instead of depicting what athletes and hardball are really like. I love sports fiction, but I had zero desire to tackle that book.
Editor here, just letting you know that it's "umbrage," not "umbridge." Thanks for an interesting take on this, it's the first I'd heard of it.
It's only an "unnecessary straw man argument" if you haven't heard of it. I would agree with touchstone that it has been the dominant narrative of that trade, and that not only was it a benefit for the Red Sox to dump the contracts, but to get prospects as well is the cherry on top.
No drop off? True, but I would go so far as to say much improved in terms of value provided. Thanks to all the voices involved with their respective scouting information.
I'm thinking that Zach's characterization of that scout's "nice quote about Greene" meant nice in a journalistic sense -- that it was a meaty and revealing quote, and not necessarily that it was complimentary.
I would have liked to have seen how good Chris Snelling would have become.
SSS, but is there a takeaway from TWalker's crazy h/ip and wild bb/ip numbers? There have been quite a few effective, hard to hit pitchers with iffy control, but is that kind of thing mechanical in this case, or a question of harnessing wild stuff?
Coyle sounds like Pedroia lite ... is that about right?
These are the most tiresome complaints in the world. "Keith Law hates the Cardinals!" "Kevin Goldstein is biased!" "Zach Mortimer doesn't like Sean Coyle for some nebulous reason!" It's so trite and mundane and boring. It is the equivalent of the postgame whipped cream pie, which the instigator loves and anyone with any sense of decorum (or humor, or just plain sense) rolls his eyes at.
I'd peg that as 60-grade speeding from Puig -- is that about right?
Does Correa at SS and Fontana at 2B down the road seem a likely, viable or realistic outcome? I see Fontana hasn't spent any time at 2B yet in the minors. Or might Correa be the one more likely to move, presumably to 3B? I know it's super early on both, just wondering what your crystal ball says.
Also, thanks very much for listing the blemishes and the likely hurdles for some of these guys. It's too easy to view prospects and focus only on the bright spots, so it's good to have a governor on the optimism that naturally surrounds these players. That's a welcome change.
Was Gary Brown really can't miss? I seem to remember hearing doubts about his bat, perhaps from Law, around draft time that year.
Is Dahl's treatment typical of how major-league orgs handle prospects? Or how the Rockies handle them, anyway?
Expected to see Tyler Matzek in one of the latter two categories after he walked five and fanned five in four innings yesterday.
I have to disagree with Andrew Koo when he says, "unders are never that fun to cheer for." Au contraire! Just pop for an under or six on the teams you despise the most, or are rivals of your favorites, and they're even MORE fun than overs!
Ben Zobrist is one of the most valuable players in baseball, I'm convinced. Versatility could well be the new undervalued asset, and that an infield-outfield guy like Jordany Valdespin or Grant Green (if their development continues) can make the eight-man bullpen much less onerous, or allow a team to keep a Jason Giambi type of specialist around.
I'd like to say this feature is saving me time by my not having to check spring boxscores, but I find myself doing that anyway. :(
Shocked that no one has mentioned the Red Sox signing Victorino for 3/39. Bradley's going to be ready pretty soon, and Victorino looks like he's ready to fall off a cliff.
As far as your nagging question at the end, Eric, yeah, you left it all out on the field. To take steroids would have been to try to seize something that wasn't really yours in the first place. Some guys did, and that's fine too. But it sounds like you got every last ounce out of your innate skills and abilities. That's a lot more than most people, who just scratch the surface of their talents for their entire lives and careers, or take shortcuts whenever possible.
Thanks for a compelling piece about your journey, and good luck down the road. I look forward to more of your writing.
I'd like to think that about the Indians, but everyone in the rotation is pitching two spots above what he seems to be (i.e. Ubaldo is a #4 masquerading as a #2) and that doesn't seem to be an ingredient for success over the course of a season.
That being said, I guess the bar to become the second wild card is not all that high.
Reading the headline "Why There Probably Are No Next Orioles" kind of felt like reading "Why There Probably Will Be No Christmas This Year."
I heartily disagree with you. They're close, but they're not (or make that shouldn't be) the same.
gel (v.) To form into a gel.
jell (v.) To set or become firmer.
To me it's clear that the first use is much more properly used when referring to chemical processes and physical substances, and the second is almost always the better use when referring to metaphorical descriptions of things like teams or coalescing and strengthening. They may have become synonyms, but they shouldn't have. "Jell" is a more vivid word there, IMO, but maybe that's because I saw my mom make jelly over the stove.
That being said, even as an editor I try not to engage in these kinds of responses because they drag the discussion down and tend to get pedantic, but sometimes corrections are warranted. As I tell overly enthusiastic co-workers, Try not to edit when you're not getting paid for it.
Was it spelled "gel" originally? I see it's "jell" now. Because "gel" is wrong there. And if you're arguing that it should be "gel," you have no idea what you're talking about.
Whatever the case is, don't be a tool. As a reader and consumer of information (as well as a journalist), I want reporters to gather information and talk to folks and ask tough questions, and I want editors to smooth over the typos and the bad grammar and the holes and the inconsistencies and the headlines and everything else that you have no idea about.
If John Perrotto is worried about dotting Is and crossing Ts to please the likes of you, then he isn't doing the stuff he's good at and should be concerned with. Get a clue.
With this very possibly being the #1 system, their 11-15 prospects would easily make other teams' top 10s. Could you please provide a list of who those guys would be? Thanks.
jashnew, thanks for a response that was a lot more polite than mine was.
As far your ancestors being miners and cowboys, I am also guessing that your ancestors probably never belonged to a race that was seen as less than human and was systematically eradicated with smallpox blankets and constant wars, moved from their lands to reservations, made to ditch their centuries-old lifestyles for ones they had no experience with (and had a hard time adjusting to), and so on. Were your ancestors ever at the bottom of the racial "totem pole" in this country, so to speak, like American Indians were? Can you not see how some members of a race that has been treated so shabbily by the dominant culture in this country might not really care to be "celebrated" by being used as mascots?
You say you don't like political correctness. Well, PC also stands for something else: Plain Courtesy. If a segment of the population says, please, stop ogling us, or stop referring to us with these names, or stop using us as mascots, or treat us as fairly as your own are treated, what you are saying by rejecting their "political correctness" is essentially, "The other groups' thoughts and wishes are not as important as ours." That is what it comes down to. You wouldn't do it if a relative asked you to not use Sue but call her Susan, so why is it less important when a someone from a different race/sexual orientation/gender asks you the same thing? You are operating from a dominant culture perspective where your POV is automatically "correct" and everyone else's is less than that. And members of the other groups aren't necessarily right, but when you reject it out of hand as being PC, you're being dismissive, unfair and, basically, prejudiced. Screeching "PC!" is the lamest, most thoughtless excuse there is for rejecting other people's points of view. You're reacting and not considering or thinking. Other people wouldn't hold their views unless they were important to them, and the views of women or minorities or gays aren't automatically less important or correct because their POV differs from yours, or the dominant culture's.
You say you'd like to talk to an ancestor of an Indian sometime. Ben Lindbergh linked to a great article with points of view from Indians, but perhaps you missed it the first time. It's here, and it has some good opinions worth considering:
I hope you're able to consider other people's points of view a little more seriously and not automatically reject them as being "PC" because they disagree with you. Walk in their shoes sometime. It's very liberating.
This is the most interesting baseball-to-real-life analogy ever.
Someone needs to brush up on his slang.
BTW, if you really consider Chief Wahoo from a "romanticize [sic] period in our history," Mr. Cthulhu above puts it much better than I ever could:
" ... this mascot is an insensitive and a relic of an era of racial intolerance ..."
But I guess I do see how conservatives view those times as "a romanticized period in our history." Remember those days when we didn't have to be considerate of minorities! Sigh ... Another julep, Uncle Tom!
That's awesome. Do you view the antebellum South, with "laborers" toiling away in the fields on plantations in the South, as being a charming and romanticized period in our history as well? Are you one of those clueless (or dishonest, I haven't figured out which) revisionists who thinks the South was merely defending "states' rights" in fighting the Civil War?
There are PLENTY of Indians who are offended by the logo, I assure you. There are also plenty who don't care, but I don't profess to speak for either group. One of the fraudulently paternalistic arguments I see trotted out in these kinds of discussion quite a bit (thankfully not much here) is: "Don't they have bigger things to worry about? It's such a petty thing." And I guess my response is: Who are you to decide what's important to someone when that issue pertains to them? Anyway, "it's just a mascot" ties in with that. How about these mocking logos for the Cleveland Negroes? Is that "just a mascot" to you?
I'll also be damned if I'm going to let someone who has twice posted remarkably, stunningly ignorant nonsense on this thread tell progressives to "realize when they are being racist." Do conservatives only have moronic defenses on this and other issues?
Well, I didn't necessarily mean that 50 years ago these were garden spots and forested regions, but that 50 years ago I imagine one can remember talk of New Jersey being a farm state or Ohio being very woodsy. There's a Forest City lumber/DIY-type national chain that got its start in Ohio the early 1900s.
Only if your sense of history doesn't go back more than, say, 50 years.
As an Indians fan going back to the mid-1970s who also knows that Chief Wahoo should be relegated to the dustbin of history, I must say that there is a part of me that feels some affection for the logo despite his obvious stereotyping. I grew up with Chief Wahoo; he graced the uniform of all sorts of players I rooted for, from scrubs like Veryzer and Duffy to phenoms like Charboneau and Snyder to stars like Sutcliffe and Carter and Belle and Thome. He's the one continuous thread with all of those guys.
I guess the best way I can put it is that, despite the fact that he's embarrassing and the fact that you know you shouldn't be so disposed to him, like a crazy aunt you keep in the attic or an annoying uncle who's obnoxious in public, Chief Wahoo is still seen as family. And it's hard to get rid of that attachment. It's a lot easier to say "ditch the Chief" when you're not a fan of the team.
That picture comes from a pretty thoughtful article, by the way. And the comments break down along the typical political lines you would expect, much as they do here.
Honestly, what's the difference between all these logos in terms of stereotyped imagery?
Honestly, if we had a baseball team with the name of the Cleveland Negroes, or the Cleveland Jews, or the Cleveland Banditos, or the Cleveland Chinamen, and a similarly cartoonish and stereotypical logo, people would immediately see how ridiculous, outdated and racist it is. But because it's an Indian, the original doormats of North America as far as Manifest Destiny goes, it's fair game. It's shameful and embarrassing.
I don't know how Dan Snyder sleeps at night, owning a team called the Washington Redskins. Oh, wait, I know -- that guy doesn't have a soul.
Yes, because the Indians you see represent ALL Indians, of course.
I was once a former lay star.
Love this feature. Nice way to get info on guys who might not necessarily fit the underrated/unknown prospect niche that BP and BA love to fill, but who haven't garnered a lot of national prominence and headlines yet either.
Jason, how do you see the very subpar Indians rotation shaking out? I guess there's a glimmer of hope that Ubaldo Jimenez can regain his form, but Brett Myers is no savior -- at best he'll eat 200 innings -- and Justin Masterson still has the crazy-high splits that make him vulnerable to stacked lineups. And each of those guys is pitching about two rotation spots above his ideal level (i.e. Jimenez is a #3 being used as a #1). Outside of Trevor Bauer, beyond these guys is a cast of suspects, retreads and other non-prospects. Is there anything here to get excited about?
No harm. It's too easy to take +/- ratings here seriously (I do it more than I should), like they're any kind of genuine value judgment ... when it's mainly just a gauge of instant emotional reactions. Don't worry about it.
I think it's the extreme self-congratulatory nature of your post that annoyed people, including me. (I've never seen anything quite that one's-own-back-slappingly enthusiastic before, such that you may need to have your rotator cuff examined.)
The value of a scoop is greatly diminished when EVERYONE has a printing press at his or her disposal. So you beat someone by 45 seconds on a scoop? Who can verify that anyway, and does it really matter in this day and age?
I think Zunino gets at least half a season in AAA for reps, plus why start his clock early.
Whither Jed Bradley? Kind of damning when you can't get a mention anywhere in this whole writeup.
Fun stuff. We always think of ourselves and our times as the pinnacle of knowledge, however. I wonder what things we think of now as state of the art and prescient will just seem goofy and out of touch in 40 years. The Verducci effect? Strasburg's kid glove treatment? Our current defensive metrics?
Who knows, maybe batting the pitcher eighth will have become standard practice by then!
I hate to be a grammar nazi, but the proper verb is "whales" -- whaling away on someone, etc. It's just such a wonderful, evocative verb that it deserves proper usage, and not "wails," which conveys pretty much the exact opposite image.
Any hope for the immature and worsening-by-the-minute Jordany Valdespin? Million-dollar talent, ten-cent head.
The "Future Potential" category is ennumerated based on the 2-8 scouting scale, right? Not the typical 1-10, which for most people is what comes to mind first.
Four names I've never seen before -- always nice to be exposed to new talent. Welcome aboard, Jason. Looking forward to more from you.
I will not laugh at Andre Dawson. State Farm's recent ad campaign with any mention of the "discount doublecheck" are the worst commercials on TV, matched perhaps only by Geico's ads with the caveman and NFLer Brian Orakpo. Sadly, Orakpo's season has been ended by injury, but the side benefit is that it seems to have taken his commercials off TV.
Underdog ... you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
The Reds were a slight betting favorite, on the order of 54% or so.
MLU! Welcome back, old friend.
You make some good points, but your certainty and your conceit are remarkably off-putting.
People don't speak like they write, and they can't go back and undo what was said or edit it or soften it. He gave his first reaction, which is completely understandable, and would be my first reaction too. It's not an easy situation to deal with, one game to save your season after playing 162. But apparently all the junior debate experts out there are in force after Romney-Obama I this week.
Wasn't there a piece on BP a month or so ago about baseball's nightmare playoff scenario, which was something like the Yankees and maybe the Rangers being the wild card teams? We're a few hours and a potential AL East tiebreaker game away from that scenario being true. Anyway, I can't find that article -- am I misremembering it? Did it appear someplace else? Thanks, everyone.
I believe this was MLB policy for a while but was yanked before it actually was employed. It's unfair to the two divisional rivals that they're forced into the playoff and the other team gets to skate in when it's no better, so the divisional rivals play to decide the division and then the loser and the other team play. One team shouldn't be automatically eliminated on the basis of being in the same division as another team it's tied with.
And still, Wil Myers sits forlornly by the phone, a single, solitary tear running down his chiseled, tanned cheekbone.
That was awesome. It's so easy to bag on Dusty, and maybe he deserves a lot of it, but this was really nice to read:
And that is how Ted found himself at home plate, with Baker's arm around him and Baker introducing him to the umpires, shaking their hands one-by-one, a big grin on his face. Ted's parents looked on in wonder.
Those comps are priceless.
This is happening at media everywhere. It costs a lot of money to hire editors (disclaimer, I am one). And yet, you see plenty of subscribers to this site who vehemently complain and are totally resistant to the idea of having ads running down the side of the page, not interfering with the content, yowling that it's ruining their BP experience. Well, guess what, folks: You can't have it both ways.
The effort to keep these going is appreciated. Thanks.
One thing I noticed, and it is not meant as a slight or a criticism as much as something I'm missing from Kevin's articles, is that he threw quite a few scouting notes into these pieces, things like noting that Tyler Cloyd in one of his early season outings was a bit short on stuff, and noting a few months later that he had excellent pitchability.
I don't necessarily expect everyone at BP to have those kinds of contacts. Everyone will do these things differently and Bradley may grow into the role, someone else may pick them up, or something else may happen. I may be missing or underrating the scouting notes that are here. But I thought it was worth mentioning from a personal standpoint.
Thank you, BP webmaster, for fixing it.
Wow. It's like losing a friend to marriage or something, or like someone else said, a great new job across the country. You will be missed more than we can say, but you can't turn this down, so we must say farewell. Good luck with the Astros!
Agreed. Would people stop doing stupid and unnecessary stuff like NOOOO to the 23rd power that blows this out and makes it unreadable?
Classy. People who hold themselves up as moral and upstanding citizens, applauding an act that was basically evil. But, you know, it was manly.
Something made me google the beaning incident earlier this year and I read some articles, almost exclusively about Molina's struggles (not the legal ones) just trying to come back from surgery and find a steady career. The articles generally had nothing more than a sentence about Christensen, mostly saying things to the effect of "whereabouts unknown."
It does sadden me, the way this story has turned and the revelations that Christensen has a pretty nice life going on after all. He shouldn't be forced to live with it for the rest of his life, but Ben Christensen really did do something so despicable and heinous and malicious in its effect on someone else that it is, essentially, unforgivable.
And now, if the charges are correct, Anthony Molina has done the same thing. That is tragic all around.
It's a complicated issue. At first, Mike Rizzo sounds like an unimaginative guy. It's just startling that in the languid pace of a 162-game season, that you wouldn't debate this stuff and consider alternatives, or would consider a plan of "running him out there till he's done" to be your best strategy. In a 16-game football season, sure -- you don't really have a ton of time to switch horses in midstream. But baseball? Come on.
At the same time, maybe this is an effective way of boxing themselves in and enforcing that innings limit. Had they shortened Strasburg's outings, given him more rest, moved him to the bullpen or in some other way enabled him to get to the end of September with 160 innings, then what? That's a much harder time to be saying, "nope, not gonna do it."
I guess when you have such a once-in-a-generation pitching prospect, maybe it's best not to try to squeeze every last drop out of him so early, and sticking to "the plan" is the safest course of all. Maybe not the most creative or effective, but the safest. With a pitcher like Strasburg, that's really not such a bad course to choose.
That would be the 280-pound version of Bartolo Colon, not the 230-pound version.
Not Kevin, but I'd say a weaker #2, a #3, or an excellent #4. I think of guys like Harang, Garland, Blanton and Colon when this category comes up.
It's also less wear and tear on his (surgically repaired) arm.
Re Soler, don't all people who are sprinting stay on the balls of their feet? Heel striking is unnatural for running, only good for walking, and to run flat footed is to increase resistance because maximizing surface contact with the ground increases drag (if we wanted to design cars to maximize gas mileage, automobile tires would be the width of bicycle tires). Perhaps it's because he's a relatively big player, possibly with decent speed for his size, that makes his stride look different? I don't mean to question your judgment here, just wondering aloud.
It wasn't that funny the first time, and when you have to label it as as joke, well ...
I thought making a comp to a player of a different race was not allowed in the canon of amateur scouting analysis.
Do you really want to wait two more weeks for this information for the privilege of reading it on dead trees?
J'accuse! Who cares what the truth may be?
And to do all of that without tipping off the batter that something different is about to occur, or maintaining control while doing something slightly different from muscle memory. It makes the multiple-angle guys like Marichal seem all the more odd and unique -- why don't we see much of that anymore?
Holy christ, don't you remember Anthony Rizzo falling flat on his face last year with the Padres? It happens!
I sure hope you mean 100k and not 100m.
Interview with Bettis that just came out:
There was a baseball novel called Screwballs from a couple of decades ago where the centerfielder was so fast, and had such a noodle arm, that it was faster for him to run the ball in than throw it.
Why is awarding HFA in the World Series through the All-Star Game any worse than the complete alternating randomness of previous seasons? This completely baffles me.
In our sim league we voted to base HFA on three factors -- how the leagues did in interleague, All-Star Game result, and best overall W-L between the two participants. That's great for a group of 30 involved owners, not so much for a population of 30 million baseball fans. Simple is better there. And to me, almost anything is better than random.
I know he has a Twitter account but it was remarkably devoid of real news or updates. He's largely been shut down since spring training; only recently (in the last couple of months) did he begin soft-tossing, and he was supposed to throw from the mound sometime in the past few weeks. Very disappointing setback for someone who looked like he had a good chance to contribute to the Rockies late this season after a great 2011.
One team has to have the home-field advantage, right? Isn't this at least a little more interesting than the sheer randomness of awarding the HFA to each league in alternating years? Honestly, it is being blown way out of proportion.
Honestly, is HFA in the World Series really that big a deal when the series rarely goes to seven games anyway? (Four times in the 17 Series since the strike.)
I mean, sure, it's an edge to have the first two games, but people get all up in arms about it like the All-Star Game result was spotting the winning league a 1-0 lead in the Series or something.
And I thought this was going to be about Bruce Rondon hitting 102 on the gun.
Who do we think the White Sox smartass is? Any guesses from the peanut gallery?
Anyone who's played a simulation baseball game like Strat-O-Matic or Diamond Mind and tried to manage a roster can tell you that a six-position guy, especially one who can hit, is immensely valuable. Think of a better-hitting Bruntlett or Bloomquist -- Phillips is an interesting comp. Start him 2-3 days a week, bring him off the bench almost anywhere the rest of the time, you get bit a little on defense but don't lose anything on offense and save a roster spot or two for a specialist reliever (a ROOGY) or pinch-hitter (Giambi).
Oakland is the home of Moneyball, after all -- perhaps versatility is the new undervalued asset.
Every team should have a Bloomquist/Bruntlett type who can play 5-6 positions. Hopefully they hit a little better than that, but such players can easily free up a spot for a Giambi-like bench bat or a specialty reliever.
If you ran this article over at ESPN, the comments field would be filled immediately with NL fans steadfastly proclaiming the Senior Circuit the stronger league by virtue of having won more World Series lately. It's astonishing how many people think seven games in October outweighs 252 games over the course of the season.
It's not that interesting.
Recent reports say Cuban outfielder Yasel Puig is in the process of establishing residency in Mexico in order to become a free agent before July 2. Any reports on his potential?
I cannot recall any reports from people saying they think he can stick, which is not the same as saying he can't, but I wouldn't be optimistic.
Um, that would be Mark Hamill. A forgotten actor even within his bright shining moment.
And paying a top prospect the minimum who's probably going to contribute just as much if not more on the field than Andrus does. No slight against Andrus, but what's so great about him? Andrus has posted a nice early third of the 2012 season, but let's see if it's really a new level of performance or just a hot two months.
Yeah, unless he can play second or short, there's no room at the inn.
The economy does a lot better when money is in the hands of ballplayers and not sitting in the bank accounts of owners.
And Roger Kieschnick, not Rogers, for the Giants.
WATG = What About This Guy.
Kevin, is Sandy Leon any kind of prospect? While the sprained ankle in his first MLB game is a drag, at least he'll make $150,000 or so getting the minimum while on the DL, right? That's a bit of a salve.
Is a career ascent like this generally a harbinger of further good things to come, or is it a question of the faster they rise, the faster they flame out? I know it would be difficult to put together a list like this from past seasons without the benefit of hindsight, so it's probably not something easily pigeonholed. Just wondering if you can glean anything from pattern recognition with these types of guys. Thanks for the interesting read.
"I'm arguing he isn't all that interesting."
"Interesting" means different things to different people. The heroes of stories are interesting because of their faults and weaknesses. Superheroes wouldn't be interesting if Superman et al weren't flawed or didn't have serious, life-threatening vulnerabilities. That's what drama means.
Frankly, what's all that interesting about Mike Trout? I don't think there's anything from a dramatic standpoint; the guy's gonna be great (yawns). Big deal. There's absolutely nothing to write about there.
But feel free to keep telling people what they should find interesting. I hope you don't plan on writing a screenplay.
You don't move Youk or Gonzalez for Will Middlebrooks. You move Will Middlebrooks for them.
That would be the River Cats. There isn't tons of talent on the Grizzlies (Giants AAA) squad right now, I assure you.
Because scouts are visual creatures. Isn't that patently obvious?
Is Dee Gordon not in this discussion?
I'm sure decisions like this are made with the knowledge that a few shrinking violets will drop their accounts. It's a risk-reward scenario, and since BP provides exclusive content that can't be obtained anyplace else, the decisions are made knowing that this gives them a little more leeway with ads. If the local metro newspaper provides grossly offensive advertising that is debilitating to the reader experience, there are other places people can go, but where are you going to go from here? Bleacher Report? Good luck with that.
So don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
I'm not the one whining here.
Toughen up a little, Jane.
Everyone wants lots of content at the most minimal cost. Sorry, you can't have it both ways. That ad is a small price to pay -- you didn't pay anything additional outside your subscription fee, in fact -- to read this story.
Content is free to consume but extremely expensive to produce -- at least, if you want decent, insightful copy that's more than what the content farms like Bleacher Report churn out.
I share reader complaints about noisy ads, about ads that obscure the type, about ads that move and jump around and flash. This does none of those, and frankly I have zero empathy for those who cry, "My poor eyes!" This is pretty mild as far as ads go, and if this bothers you I hesitate to ask where you do actually get your real news.
I think kowloon was being sarcastic.
Where do the three-star orgs start? More seriously, are there clear tiers here for you?
Nothing on Michael Schwimer? His blog entries on the art of pitching were both fascinating and educational.
Any sign of Kentrail Davis, or is his career doomed to run on the side of a milk carton?
I think Wood faltered because of one monster year and a bunch of okay ones from inflated hitting environments, making him look a lot better than he really was. One excellent rule of thumb (again, not definitive, but works more often than it fails) is to discount Angels hitting prospects a little bit and bump up their pitching prospects because of the offensive environment they play in in the minor leagues.
If he were younger, there's a pretty good chance Josh Collmenter would not even be in the Top 20 25 and under.
-- Guessing the 3-star prospects run a ways down that 12+ list?
-- Four of the six pitchers (all them other than Moore and Guerrieri) on the Rays' Top 11 are listed as possibly being in flux in terms of role. Is this some kind of organizational flexibility, a case of talents who haven't yet hit their strides, random chance, pitchers who seem currently miscast or nothing that can be characterized across a number of different players?
-- Is there anything on Matt Bush's makeup? Have failure and disappointment tempered him somewhat and gotten him to mature?
Completely inappropriate and doesn't belong on these threads.
Bully for you. I meant "credential" in a professional sense rather than an academic one.
I also know a TON of J-grads whom I wouldn't hire to keep the coffee pot filled. If a degree is your top credential, you have some work to do.
It's Wojciechowski. Also, I don't think Zack Cox, Ronald Torreyes and Rich Poythress are going to cut it as hurlers.
Nice cherry picking.
It's easy to take shots. It's a hell of a lot harder to produce. So produce. Please, share with the world your infinite wisdom and prospect knowledge.
In addition, it's the bottom half of the list. Did you expect the success rate there to be the same as the top half? If so, that's idiotic. The top 20 are the blue chips, 20-50 are solid prospects, 50-100 are a lot more flyers and speculative stocks. The success rate there is supposed to be lower. If it's higher than the rest of the list, then that list has a lot bigger problems than the one you cite.
It sounds like your expectations are a wee bit out of whack.
Unfortunately LaRussa is no longer the manager or he might be more willing to give Carpenter a shot at 2B, considering his history of trying guys like Schumaker there.
If they have nothing in common, then why bring them up? That's the most facile, ridiculous comparison ever.
Ceiling is by far the biggest consideration. Hector Sanchez is the Domino's guy at your door, Tommy Joseph is the promise of excellent pizza, but you have to wait 90 minutes.
Reminds me of what Bill James said once, that players named Black are usually white and players named White are usually black.
Of course this is possible. If it can happen in any profession on earth, there's no reason it can't happen here as well. The front office can feud with the manager, who won't play the GM's pick; the manager can feud with the player and bury him on the bench; as in Belt's case, the needs of the team can outweigh his chances to play, grow and develop; an organization may not be particularly good at developing pitchers or hitters ... the list goes on and on.
If Joseph forces himself into the picture, it seems pretty evident that the Giants would not be reluctant to move Posey out from behind the plate at least part of the time, which would then leave them with a surplus of 1B types. But Pill is a bench type and Belt might be able to handle LF. Bochy isn't interested in overworking his backstops.
Where do the 1-star prospects start?
They weren't there before. My excerpt was a direct quote, so that's kind of unfair to throw that in without acknowledging the edit.
Shouldn't that be "a lack of" confidence in Michael Taylor at #12?
"12. Michael Taylor, OF: He made some improvements in 2011, but the A's showed confidence in Taylor by acquiring Reddick and re-signing Crisp."
As far as ethnic stereotyping goes, I've seen a lot worse, and of more recent vintage. Hell, it's Baseball Digest, I'd have been surprised if that stuff wasn't in there.
Before looking at deadheadbrewer's response, as soon as I saw the 300 PAs in 2012, my first reaction was that 100 would have been a more accurate over-under number.
Dude ... are you autistic or something?
"The BP political correctness squad"? Yeah, it's everyone else's problem, not yours. Did you ever realize that all of your dissatisfying relationships have one thing in common? When you figure out what that is, get back to us.
Yeah, never mind the propaganda that tobacco companies fed smokers for decades. Asbestos filters, conspiracies to hide damaging scientific reports, and the entire advertising and entertainment industry's campaign to paint smokers as cool. Anyone who thinks that health campaigns to point out the damage of secondhand smoke are worse has not been paying attention, or is devoted to the principle of industry and profit above all.
No one's infringing on your rights and saying you can't smoke. You just can't smoke here.
Fat is overrated as a dietary no-no. Carbs are much worse for you.
Is Mike Carp much more valuable than Kyle Seager? Has Seager's role or ceiling changed? Sure seems like the guy can really hit.
There was an article some years ago from some froufrou NYC food writer who wanted to get closer to the sources of her food, so she went to the Amazon or somewhere and caught a fish, and they cooked it for her at the (undoubtedly four-star) hotel restaurant, and then she couldn't eat it -- the idea of it made her sick. I don't think it gets any more sanitized and disconnected than that. AND SHE WROTE ABOUT FOOD FOR A LIVING. Unreal.
The video is still available at Deadspin:
I noticed these pieces in the newsletter and wanted to say I really enjoy them. More than once I've finished it and thought, that guy really captured what I was thinking (like about Mark Cuban being an owner to fear). It's like the trend toward short mini-columns in newspapers; not everything needs to be stretched out to 20 column inches, and some things are handled really well and even better in half that length. Keep up the good work.
Sorry, just got up ... obviously that's "When you've got to fill the maw of a beast that's never FULL."
To me this article is a perfect example of the difference between daily journalism and reflective, non-deadline sites like BP. Not defending Couch's point of view, the angle he took or the correctness of his pronouncements, which I think are seriously flawed, but the guy probably has to file three or maybe even four columns a week -- a pace I'd never want to operate at. When you've got to fill the maw of a beast that's never hungry, you're going to go oftentimes for the column that generates the most reaction while also being the easiest to file -- call the loquacious Gossage, do a little research, spend a couple of hours over the keyboard letting beads of blood form on your forehead (was that Red Smith's quote?), and that's one column down. Of the three that your job requires that week.
That being said, those columns should be taken apart (as was done most excellently here), if only to correct the record and add a dissenting view in the marketplace of ideas. I don't like that newspapers and websites demand so much of their columnists. But I think it does mitigate the situation somewhat to understand what those guys are up against, and take these things with a grain of salt.
You are assuming here that moving the fences is being done for strategic reasons. My reading of this situation is that moving the fences in is being done to generate offense ... and therefore put people in the seats. 7-6 ballgames are, according to the planners, more attractive than 3-2 games. They may or may not be correct, I don't know, but I think that on-field concerns are not at the top of the list of reasons for doing this. They may cite Wright's power or whatever, but that's just mouthing the words.
Not to be that guy, but it's Mickey Owen, not Owens.
The NFL player you mention is named Mike Tolbert, not Matt, the Twins infielder.
It's because you're being uppity, Steven. You should know your place, according to how some people think.
I'm curious how you jibe your statement "never go against the popular opinion" with your later position that Goldman's statements are sure to "piss off half his readership."
Take away the thumbs-down then, and just count the way the comments are distributed. But you won't do that, because it's another shot in your bow, and you can't stand what that tells you. Because your illusion is your reality. Have a good weekend.
I would say that posting such a rant on ESPN would be pissing off half the readership, if not more. Just check how the the reader thumbs-up and thumbs-down are distributed on this article alone at Baseball Prospectus, a site that caters to a more sophisticated audience.
I usually try to be more delicate about this subject, but the latest stories of the audience at the Florida debate ("let him die!") and Rick Perry proudly proclaiming himself to be the anti-intellectual candidate tell me that, to put it not so delicately, intelligence corresponds with a more nuanced view of the way the world works, and a lack of intelligence (or perhaps just a brain chemistry that embraces fear before compassion) corresponds with conservatism. You can dislike it, you can thumbs down me, you can look me up and send me nasty notes. I don't care. The reader response to this article alone and its comments is proof enough to me that "half of his readership" being conservative, at this site, anyway, is an enormous lie. Perhaps you should ask yourself why this is, and why people like you cling so desperately to that illusion.
You didn't have to read it. It's like people are ashamed of having the flaws in their politics pointed out. If you can't stand having a little light shined on your POV here, how are you going to defend it in a public sphere? By singing "God Bless America" at the top of your lungs and shouting naysayers down?
Shouldn't Charlie Culberson be in this discussion?
Jason Grey in his ESPN column today said the Diamondbacks want to keep Parker's innings around 125 as he comes back from TJ, and he's at 121 and change now.
Is snarky klaw posting under your name?
Andy Oliver ... is that 17.7 pitches per inning?
Now that is an injury stack, almost epic in its breadth. Expect to see some (or a whole lot) of Dan Runzler, Eric Surkamp, Miguel Tejada, Emmanuel Burriss and Darren Ford in the coming days and weeks.
It's an EPIC place to hit. Along with High Desert, those are the two California League parks that come to mind as being especially favorable bandboxes.
Or Jimmy Piersall?
Do you really think anything's changed that much in two weeks?
That was exactly my first thought.
You might disagree with the prevailing community standards, but all the say you get is your little corner of it. That's the definition of "community standards."
all4themoney also chose to make groundless accusations and admitted he made a bad choice of words, basically destroying his "factual argument."
Other than that, your points are just peachy.
I don't get the feeling it's roids as much as stimulants -- greenies and ADD drugs like Ritalin to sharpen focus and get guys through the dog days.
Vlad is a bad comp for any free swinger (outside of Pablo Sandoval) in the same way that Jamie Moyer is a bad comp for soft-tossing lefties or Greg Maddux is a bad comp for righties with pinpoint control. Outliers are just that, and tools matter. I just don't see how a bad-bodied, unathletic guy compares to Vlad in any way. Adams' and Guerrero's statistics might be superficially similar, but when you factor in body type and tools, the stats become a lot less meaningful IMO. Nobody had the plate coverage Vlad did, and to ask that of an unathletic dumptruck seems wildly optimistic.
If there's a very close debate over who's the No. 1 prospect in the minors, and Trout started the year ahead of Harper in terms of experience and level, there's no way 10-1 was close. I would have made it 50-50 or Trout a very slight fave.
"I'm gonna give you some good advice, Brian Clough. No matter how good you think you are or how clever, how many fancy new friends you make on the telly, the reality of footballing life is this:
"The chairman is the boss, then comes the directors, then the secretary, then the fans, then the players, and then finally, last of all, bottom of the heap, the lowest of the low, comes the one, who in the end, we can all do without -- the f---ing manager." -- Sam Longson, "The Damned United"
I thought Harry was being sarcastic at first.
"The case for:"
Arquimedes Caminero is almost as great a name as Arquimedez Pozo.
David Lough ... is that pronounced Luff, Low, Lock or something else?
Thanks for stopping by, Mr. Sabean.
I did get it, and I think the audience at MCC would too, but they know Grant's work and his byline.
Know your audience. This ain't McCovey Cove Chronicles.
Your points of view aren't being censored by BP because they're edgy and controversial. Your points of view are being screened by fellow readers because your posts are stupid, indulgent and obnoxious. Perhaps one day you'll learn the difference.
You know what else was happening 100 years ago in sports? Dozens of football players were dying every season from the brutality on the field. Teddy Roosevelt -- perhaps the manliest president ever -- threatened to ban football if the game was not made safer, and among the changes were the invention of the forward pass, a ban on gang tackling and increasing the yardage needed for a first down from 5 to 10. If testosterone-fueled Teddy Roosevelt can advocate for safer football, I'd think you could do the same. Baseball is better when better catchers are on the field.
Part of me likes those kinds of collisions, and part of me sees them as completely unnecessary. But in the end, it's difficult enough standing in against a 95-mph fastball. Catchers and baserunners don't need to prove their toughness to me. I feel sad for you, hyprvypr, that they need to prove themselves to you.
It's not that rational people don't have emotions. It's that the emotional people redline easily and let those feelings guide their actions, as opposed to calmly thinking through things. It's why anger management was invented.
It did strike me as a bit of a gratuitous comment (and I am a Buchholz owner), but what I find really interesting is the difference between Buchholz and Mike Leake in the magnitude of their offenses and the disproportionate attention paid to them. I guess the takeaways are:
-- If you're going to steal something, make it something really big, not something really small, and
-- If you're going to get caught, do it before you make your way into the spotlight.
There are two kinds of people in the world, rational people and emotional people, and Nyjer Morgan pretty clearly seems to fit in the latter group. Even his greetings for people he knows are extreme, as Perrotto relates. He thrives on intensity and adrenaline, and it becomes very easy to see baseball games as an us-vs.-them war (as per McCutchen's quote about loving him as a teammate and hating him as a rival), as opposed to a friendly corporate-sponsored competition where it's not necessary to hurt anyone to try to win. If he was in a frat he'd be egging the house across the street; if he was in a gang, he'd have your back. There's nothing necessarily wrong with it until it gets out of hand, but emotional people tend to have short fuses, and it seems to be a pretty safe bet that he'll blow up again at some point, because it's all he knows. He could use some help managing his anger and emotions (remember the play where he went to catch a deep fly, thought he knocked it over the fence, and erupted angrily, throwing a fist in the air while the ball rolled a few feet away). Of course, that could also diminish his fuel as an athlete. It'll be interesting to see what happens next. Or maybe not so much, really.
I'm an Indians fan, but's hard for me to take rankings seriously that have the Tribe atop the pile. No one would take them seriously as an AL contender, you'd be hard-pressed to find them favored to beat many teams in a head-to-head game ... or are these just meant to show who had the best previous week or two? I'm not saying I expect these to have predictive significance necessarily, but who really believes the Indians are the best team in the American League?
Bill Bene, anyone?
Horse odds get below even money all the time, like with extreme favorites who are 2/5 ... betting $5 to win $2 ($7 payoff, $5 stake plus $2 winnings). Your explanation is flawed, and while Kevin has the right to post any numbers he wants (and they don't have to make real sense), I'd prefer that his rabid supporters not defend those numbers with inconsistent, poorly thought out or flat-out wrong logic.
Actually, the stake is not (should not be) counted in the odds listing. 2-1 odds means you get three back when you bet one. 1-1 is even money. 1-2 would be a -200 fave, betting two to win one (but getting three back).
113 pitches over nine innings is a heck of a lot different than 113 pitches over five or six.
I can think of three possible reasons:
-- Emaus is just having a subpar spring.
-- Major league camp is essentially a room full of beauty queens, and Emaus looks deficient in comparison, as just about any woman would when you evaluate on traditional metrics.
-- Expectations have changed, just as one has different expectations for a relationship prospect versus taking on a spouse. Maybe a boyfriend's charms (enjoys a drink or five, raffish, cool and independent and unafraid to proclaim so) look a lot less appealing once you start to consider the prospect of marriage. None of those positive comments that xnumberoneson mentioned seem to be all that out of the ordinary for a prospect (and two are really not all that glowing), but once you're considering marrying your team to him, you start looking at the flaws and faults a lot more closely than you did when you were thinking, hmm, this person might be relationship material and these positive qualities are why.
Now, undoubtedly the point of scouting should be to grade each person individually, but I suspect that biases and comparisons inevitably creep in. I tip my hat to anyone who finds their significant other to be just as appealing in a room of beauty queens and The Most Interesting Men in the World.